We performed a comparison between Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Cisco Sourcefire SNORT based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, Cisco, Akamai and others in Cloud and Data Center Security."The real bonus is the fact that we can secure applications, all the way down to the individual services, on each host. It's actually more granular security than we can get out of a traditional firewall."
"I found the solution to be stable."
"This tool greatly helps in understanding the footprint of the attacks."
"Application Ring-Fencing and Deception Server, which is basically like a honeypot, are pretty useful features."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility of processes and connections."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the maps and ring fencing that help monitor events."
"The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"We like the centralized management of the firewalls. Until we installed Guardicore Centra, we managed all our firewalls individually, so making changes was complicated, difficult, and time-consuming."
"The product is inexpensive compared to leading brands such as Palo Alto or Fortinet."
"The solution is rather easy to use."
"Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is easy to configure and the reporting is great. It's also very user-friendly."
"The whole solution is very good, and stable."
"The solution is stable."
"In general, the features are all great. However, if I need to take hardware for ASA, because they need to upgrade to Firepower, we want to create rules. For that, most of the time we go to the command line. Right now Firepower is working really hard on the grid. You can apply all those rules to the grid. Even if you want to monitor the logs, for example, the activity will tell you which particular user has been blocked because of that rule. Firepower's monitoring interface is very good, because you can see each and every piece. ASA also had it, but there you needed to type the command and be under the server to see all that stuff. In Firepower you have the possibility to go directly to the firewall. The way the monitoring is displayed is also very nice. The feature I appreciate most in Firepower is actually the grid. The grid has worked very well."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility that we have across the virtual environment."
"I like most of Cisco's features, like malware detection and URL filtering."
"Customers would want to see the cost improved."
"In our version, when using the terminal server, we cannot exclude user tasks for each session."
"They can maybe improve their customer service just because they are kind of a small organization, and customer service isn't as big as others such as VMware."
"The dashboard needs improvement. It should be more flexible so that I can easily see what I want or need to see."
"Incident tagging could be improved. Other vendors offer semi-automatic tagging, which Guardicore doesn't yet have."
"Guardicore Centra should incorporate automation so that we don't require to write custom scripts and APIs. The tool also has limitations on rules where it allows only sixty thousand rules. Our clients have also commented that there are too many manual clicks and effort to do changes. I think that the incorporation of automation can help our clients make changes with confidence and without the possibility of human error."
"Clients would like to see that the security policies of GuardiCore can continue to be comparable to all the major firewall players out there."
"The product needs a few features like enhanced user policies and payload-level inspection to improve the offering."
"We are unhappy with technical support for this solution, and it is not as professional as what we typically expect from Cisco."
"I don't think this solution is a time-based control system, because one cannot filter traffic based on time."
"I did not experience any pain points that required improvement. Maybe a couple of false-positives, but that's about it."
"I would like to have analytics included in the suite."
"The customization of the rules can be simplified."
"The initial setup is a little difficult compared to other products in the market. It depends on the environment. If we are doing any migration, it might take months in a brown-field environment."
"Integration with other components — even Cisco's own products — can be enhanced to improve administrative experience."
"If the price is brought down then everybody will be happy."
More Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is ranked 3rd in Cloud and Data Center Security with 17 reviews while Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is ranked 15th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 17 reviews. Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is rated 8.2, while Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Akamai Guardicore Segmentation writes "Allowed us to build out a data center topology without worrying about placement of physical or virtual firewalls that can create bottlenecks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Sourcefire SNORT writes "The solution provides visibility across virtual environments, protects internal networks, and is scalable to meet organizational needs". Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is most compared with Illumio, VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Workload, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, whereas Cisco Sourcefire SNORT is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Cisco NGIPS, Check Point IPS, Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention and Darktrace.
We monitor all Cloud and Data Center Security reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.